Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-04-19MINUTES Ap~i/ Z9, 2007 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 n.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Commissioner Zemke, Vi ce Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Mike Lappen, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Chadrick Smalley, Associate Planner Allison Knapp, Consultant Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Building Division: Barry Mammini, Senior Building Inspector City Attorney: Sky Woodruff, Assistant City Attorney Engineering Division: Ray Razavi, City Engineer Sam Bautista, Senior Civil Engineer Police Department: Sergeant Alan Normandy, Planning Liaison Fire Prevention. Brian Niswonger, Assistant Fire Marshall CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW No Changes ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of Regular Meeting minutes of February 15, 2007. Motion Teglia /Second Sim to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by majority voice vote. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Kaiser Medical Office -Time Extension Kaiser/Owner Kaiser/Applicant 230 Oyster Point Blvd. PCA06-0008: UP04-0031, PM04-0003, DR04-0077, 8~ TDM04-0004 (Continue from April 5, 2007) None None Time Extension for a Use Permit and Design Review to allow the construction of a single-story medical office building on Oyster Point Boulevard in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with Planning Commission Meeting of April 19, 2007 SSFMC Chapters 20.24 and 20.81. Public Hearing opened. Dr. Tsong, Kaiser Representative, gave a brief overview of the project. Gary Juressic, Architect, and Michael Painter gave a PowerPoint presentation of the building design, parking circulation and landscaping and showed 4 options for the meandering path. Commissioner Sim noted that option 4, where there are more trees emphasizing one side, makes a strong statement. Commissioner Teglia pointed out that the trees can also be staggered. Commissioner Teglia suggested that the stamped concrete could be continued to the driveway area. Senior Planner Carlson noted that one of the Engineering Division requirements is to have a standard apron which will have to be concrete and is consistent with using colored concrete. Chairperson Prouty asked for the gallon size of tree they were going to use. Mr. Painter noted that they will be Fremont Poplars of 15 or 24 inch box trees. He pointed out that the Public Works Department is concerned with regards to tree roots in relationship to the utility lines and noted that the variety of trees will be looked at again. Vice Chairperson Giusti asked if a Lombardi Poplar was being used. Mr. Painter replied that they would not use this species because they have invasive roots. Commissioner Teglia noted that there are root corrals that can be used to direct the roots lower to keep them from going out onto the street. He asked if they can be used for this project. Mr. Painter replied affirmatively. Chairperson Prouty noted that this could be added as a condition of approval. There being no speakers, the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Sim asked that the entryway be expanded with stamped concrete to make a dramatic pedestrian friendly statement. Chairperson Prouty noted that it should go through to where the stamped concrete is on the site to direct the public to that area. Senior Planner Carlson informed the Commission that a modification to the Use Permit will be needed if they are going to add conditions which would also require that the item be noticed as a modification. Alternatively he pointed out that the Commission can direct staff to find the plans submitted for plan check consistent with the Commission's recommendations in which case a modification would not be necessary. Senior Planner Carlson stated that if the plans before the Commission are consistent with their intent for a landscaped and streetscape area they can direct staff as to what should be included such as colored concrete. Commissioner Teglia asked Assistant City Attorney Woodruff if the Commission could grant the Use Permit extension, choose option 4 and direct staff to incorporate the Commission's comments and apply these to the Plan Check or if a Use Permit Modification is needed to reach the Commission's goals. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff noted that staff will have sufficient authority to deny any final building proposal that is not consistent with the direction given by the Commission at this meeting. Senior Planner Carlson noted that Public Works is not supportive of the trees in the utility area as shown on option 4 with trees between the curb and sidewalk but are willing to allow trees behind it so the roots will not interfere with the utility area. He stated that they will allow for ground cover and shrubs but are requiring a 14 foot clearance on the travel lanes. Commissioner Teglia noted that root guards can be used to direct roots down. He noted that the experts need to locate the utilities and see what kind of technologies can be used to direct roots to the proper locations. He pointed out that the retaining walls also need to be decorative. Chairperson Prouty noted that this area is an entrance into South San Francisco and would like to see if the utilities or sidewalk could be relocated to allow landscaping. s:\M%wutes\~iwa~Czed r~tCwutes\2oo~\04-29-0~ 2pC Miwutes.doc page 2 of ~ Planning Commission Meeting of April 19, 2007 Commissioner Honan noted that the retaining wall does not have to be a brick wall and suggested a stamped rock wall that would be more appealing. Motion Teglia /Second Giusti to approve time extension PCA06-0008: UP04-0031, PM04-0003, DR04- 0077, & TDM04-0004 and directing staff that the final plan check reflect the following requirements: • Page L.44 -option 4 -Keeping the trees • Requiring that the architect explore the surface finish of the retaining walls to reflect a style like the walls in the Terrabay Development and Juniperro Serra Boulevard facing the street. • Expand the stamped concrete entryway from the driveway to the plaza which could be a reverse curve to the plaza. Roll Call: Ayes: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by roll call vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 3. 6 MONTH REVIEW KC & L Seafood, Inc. Kin Man "Timmy" Kan -Owner Fumio Suda, Architect -Applicant 390 Swift Ave. #10 P05-0041: UP05-0013 6 Month Review -Use Permit to allow a seafood processing plant to operate in a 5,512 sq. ft. tenant space in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32 and 20.81 Associate Planner Smalley presented the staff report and recommended that the review be deferred for 6 months. Motion Teglia /Second Zemke to review in another 6 months. Approved by unanimous voice vote. 4. 6 MONTH REVIEW First Baptist Church Playground First Baptist Church of SSF/Owner 8~ Applicant 600 Grand Avenue P06-0022: UP06-0007, DR06-0019 6 Month Review -Use Permit and Design Review to allow the relocation of a playground for a private school, including a 4.5 foot tall fence and outdoor play structure, which encroaches into both the public right-of-way and the minimum required 15 foot front setback on a site located at 600 Grand Avenue in the R-3-L Multi- Family Residential Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.20, 20.73, 20.82 & 20.85. Associate Planner Smalley presented the staff report and recommended that the review be deferred for 3 months. George Corey, representing the applicant, noted that the applicant is pursuing several grants to fund the project and felt that three months should be sufficient. Motion Teglia /Second Giusti to review in another 3 months. Recess called at 7:03 p.m. Recalled to order at 7:10 p.m. s:\r~Cwutes~~CwaLLzed NtCwutes~oo~~0~-29-0~ izpC M%wutes.doc page s o f ~ Planning Commission Meeting of April 19, 2007 5. STUDY SESSION Genentech 650 GENENTECH INC/ owner 8~ applicant 680 Forbes Blvd P06-0136: UP06-0032 & DR06-0102 Building 50 -Use Permit application to allow Genentech to demolish an existing surface parking lot adjacent to Building 51 (642 Forbes Boulevard) and construct a new 165,340-square-foot R&D/Manufacturing/Lab/Office Building located at 680 Forbes Boulevard on the Lower Campus within the Genentech R8~D Overlay District per SSFMC Chapters 20.39, 20.40 & 20.81 Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report. Shar Zamanpour -Genentech Inc., ]ohn Michal - Flad Architects and Michael Painter - MPA Design presented the project. Commissioner Honan stated that there should be a PowerPoint presentation when the project returns to allow the N audience and those present to view the proposed project Commissioner Moore asked if the smoke stack will appear as shown in the renderings. Mr. Michal replied that the stacks are located in the center of the building and will not be visible from many points around the building. Chairperson Prouty asked for the height of buildings 7.1 and 7.2 and noted that they look smaller than building 50. Mr. Michal indicated that building 7 is three stories tall plus the penthouse. Chairperson Prouty noted that building 51 does not fit in with the other buildings. Ms. Zamanpour clarified that building 50 is 95 feet high, building 7 is 70 feet and building 6 is 101 feet in height. Chairperson Prouty asked what the difference in height was from building 7 and building 50. Ms. Zamanpour noted that the difference in height is 25 feet and added that the heavy landscaping allows a park like environment. Chairperson Prouty felt that the requirements of the Master Plan were to lower the buildings closet to Forbes Boulevard. Ms. Zamanpour noted that they are not going to be higher than the buildings at the top of the hill. Chairperson Prouty noted that there massing of the building is too big. Commissioner Teglia noted that the building does not respect the rest of the heights from the Forbes perspective. He stated that the building 50 steps forward from buildings 7.1 and 7.2. He noted that building 7 was stepped and building 50 does not step back. He suggested incorporating the tiering effect, stepping the building back on the property, or lowering the height of the current proposal. He noted his concern with the perforated metal screening. He noted that the materials from buildings 7.1 and 7.2 should not be incorporated into the new building because it can stand on its own merits. Commissioner Honan felt that the building was too big. She was concerned that the building does not comply with the Master Plan for the lower campus because of the size of the building and it also is predominantly office space. She noted that office space demands more parking and was concerned with tack of parking. She also stated that the Fire Department had issues with the proposal and would like to hear the resolution of these issues when the project returns to the Commission. Commissioner Zemke reiterated the Commission's concerns with regards to the massing. He pointed out that the northwest corner of the building will be very prominent. He pointed out that he likes the way the materials were tied together. He asked if the berm along Forbes Boulevard would stay in place. Mr. Michal noted that the berm will be reshaped but will remain with new project. Commissioner Sim stated that Genentech has carved out the lobby in other projects and noted that this could also be done for this proposal to create an interlock with the landscape theme. He added that there can be a higher building with architectural devices but the proposal is not stealthed enough to fit the character of the Master Plan. He added that there could be some horizontal lighting element on the lattice piece that could be an aesthetic feature to the campus. s:\M%v~utes\~CwAI.%zed nii,wutes\2oo~\o~t-i9-off Fzpc n~tCwutes.doc page 4 of ~ Planning Commission Meeting of April 19, 2007 Chairperson Prouty reiterated his comments with regards to the height of the building. He noted that the building needs to setback from the street. Commissioner Honan and Chairperson Prouty noted that an additional study session is necessary on the project. Commissioner Teglia was concerned with some of the aspects of the Master Plan that need to be resolved with regards to this building. He noted that the schedule will need to be accelerated on completing the entrances, open space and amenities. Commissioner Honan asked if the Commission should hold off on any approvals until some of the Master Plan items are resolved. She added that she would be more comfortable having new projects agendized with these issues being resolved. Commissioner Teglia and Chairperson Prouty agreed with Commissioner Honan. 6. STUDY SESSION SSF Conference Center The City of SSF/Owner SSF Conference Center/Applicant 255 S Airport Blvd P07-0030: UPM07-0003 & DR07-0019 Use Permit Modification to expand the existing Conference Center by constructing a 4,100 sf meeting room addition in the Planned Commercial (P-C) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.81 & 20.24. Senior Planner Lappen presented the staff report. Sandra OToole -Conference Center Director and John Lucchesi -Architect gave a presentation on the proposed addition to the conference center. Chairperson Prouty asked how the building frame would be fixed to the foundation. Mr. Lucchesi noted that columns have base plates that are bolted down to a concrete foundation. Chairperson Prouty questioned if the roof was a tent type of roof. Mr. Lucchesi noted that it is a three dimensional structure with space frames similar to pyramidal forms and is about 1/8th of an inch thick. Vice Chairperson Giusti noted that a department store with this type of roof was in the Fashion Island Shopping Center and noted that the temperature varied and it had leak problems. Mr. Lucchesi noted that the building will be conditioned with a very sophisticated drainage system so water does not collect on the roof. Vice Chairperson Giusti noted that this type of roof seems to move with high winds and asked if this will be the case with this building. Mr. Lucchesi stated that the roof would be stationary. Commissioner Moore questioned if the prefabricated building was pursued because it was cost effective or for timeliness. Mr. Lucchesi noted that efficiency of speed of construction and procurement was one reason and initial cost was a factor. Mr. Lucchesi continued with the presentation of the proposed building location. Commissioner Teglia was concerned with access to the building through the wind tunnel of Wondercolor Drive. He asked that they look at extending the lobby hall through the storage to have interior access. He stated that the 6 foot corridor could be eliminated to tie the two buildings together. Chairperson Prouty added that by moving the prefabricated building next to the existing building all the mechanical and other types of access will be easier. Mr. Lucchesi noted that there will be a new mechanical piece of equipment for the building on the ground in an enclosure because it cannot go on the roof. Commissioner Honan asked why the building was not attached to the Conference Center. Mr. Lucchesi stated that there are structural issues with foundations being up against eachother with two different kinds of buildings and potential for movement in a seismic event. He noted that another reason is that the existing Conference Center s:\Miin.utes~~twalized Mivt utesL2o0~~04-sy-off RPC r~ti~n.utes.doc Page .s of ~ Planning Commission Meeting of April 19, 2007 floor is right at the asphalt exterior grade at the rear of the building. He added that the prefabricated building is slightly elevated off of grade and if the two buildings are joined there will be accessibility issues between the two buildings. He noted that there are ramps between the two buildings. Mr. Lucchesi noted that the storage space is partitioned and full of large racks of tables and chairs. Commissioner Teglia noted that the existing lobby could be extended. Mr. Lucchesi noted that a wall could not go on the sidewalk because of the property line is two feet from the sidewalk which wilt not be permitted. Commissioner Honan asked why the space between the two buildings needs to be six feet and not any closer. Mr. Lucchesi noted that it is based on functionality for ADA accessibility. Commissioner Sim noted that there are area separation issues pertaining to fire, life and safety issues. Commissioner Sim asked if the space between the foundation and the building floor will be covered. Mr. Lucchesi noted that they will try to build a curb up and not have to add a skirt. Commissioner Sim asked what the warranty on the building is. Mr. Lucchesi noted that the roof membrane has a 20 year warranty. Ms. OToole noted that there is not a timeline on how long they will keep the site. She added that they will clean the exterior of this building in conjunction with the existing facility. Chairperson Prouty asked if the cost is lower with a prefabricated building than to build a new building. Ms. OToole noted that this structure enables the Conference Center to operate some additional square footage and the project will be paid for with the Conference Center Authority enterprise fund because the general fund dollars cannot be used for the Conference Center. She added that there will be air conditioning, heating, sound, Internet service and the security system will be in the structure. Commissioner Zemke clarified that this is not setting a precedent because it is behind the building out of the public view. He questioned if this will impact the parking because there will be a loss of 15 parking spaces. Ms. OToole noted that they are still meeting the required parking because of the parking available with the hotels and the offsite parking available across the street. Commissioner Zemke noted that the wall will be too blank. Ms. OToole noted that they plan to have some type of protection from the elements on the walkway. Commissioner Zemke noted that a mural or something that will be aesthetically pleasing can mitigate the impact of the bare wall. Chairperson Prouty suggested adding a structure between the two buildings and making the building a few feet smaller. Mr. Lucchesi noted that the building size is set to 5x5 meter increments, so any reduction would significantly reduce the building size. Vice Chairperson Giusti noted that there are exit doors on the other side of the trash enclosure and asked if the prefabricated building could go on that side. Commissioner Moore asked if the Fire Department had any issues with the building. Assistant Fire Marshall Niswonger noted that he met with Ms. OToole on the prefabricated building and added that the building will have the same requirements as a permanent building. Chairperson Prouty asked if a drop ceiling could be installed to hide the sprinkler system. Mr. Lucchesi noted that they did not look into hanging the ceiling and added that a drop ceiling may not be aesthetically pleasing. ITEMS FROM STAFF Chief Planner Kalkin informed the Commission that Genentech is requesting a subcommittee of the Planning Commission to work with them on the design issues for Building 50 Chairperson Prouty appointed Commissioner Sim and Commissioner Teglia to the Building 50 subcommittee. Chief Planner Kalkin added that the City Council has requested a joint meeting with the City Council to kick off the. Zoning Ordinance Update for Monday, May 21~`. Commissioner Moore and Commissioner Zemke noted that would be out of the City on that week. s:\MCwutes\~twal~zed r~tiwutes\2oo~\o~-i9-off Fzpe Mtv~.utes.doe Page 6 o f ~ Planning Commission Meeting of April 19, 2007 ITEMS FROM COMMISSION None Chairperson Prouty commended Code Enforcement for resolving some issues with Lowes and Home Depot. Assistant Fire Marshall Niswonger informed the Commission that a 24 hour security guard has been agreed upon by Lowes due to over 30 break-ins to strip pipe and wire. He noted that this procedure will also be followed with Home Depot. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC AD.7OURNMENT Motion Teglia /Second Moore to adjourn the me -~~ +,... / Susy alkin Secretary to he Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SK/bla None 10:37 P.M. s:V~nCwutes~~~walCzed M~wutes~2oo~~o4-i9-off R.PC M~wutes.doc Page ~ ~ f ~